________________
302
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
[Vol. XXXII 3. Bijolis inscription of Sömēsvara, dated V.S. 1226(1169-70 A.D.), Phälguna-vadi 3, Thursday,
February 5, 1170 A.D. The year began before the month of Phālguna. 4. Revasa inscription of Sõmēsvara, dated V.S. 1230(1173-74 A.D.), Ashādha-sudi 9, Monday June
10, 1174 A.D. The year began after the month of Ashädha. 5. Anvalda inscription of Sömēsvara, dated V.S. 1234 (1177-78 A.D.), Bhädra-sudi 4, Friday
August 18, 1178 A.D. The year began after the month of Bhadrapada. 6. Phalodi inscription of Prithviraja III, dated V.S. 1236 (1179-80 A.D.), Prathama-Asha
dha-sudi 10, Wednesday June 4, 1180 A.D. The year began after the month of Ashādha. 7. Udaipur Victoria Hall Museum inscription of Prithviraja III, dated V.S. 1244 (1187-88 A.D.).
Phālguna-sudi 31, Friday February 12, 1188 A.D. The year began before the month of Phālguna.
The above dates would show that the Vikrame year commenced between the months of Bhādrapada and Märgaśīrsha. The year thus appears to have been Kārttikādi and not Chaitrādi, Ashādhādi or Srāvanādi. Of the Ashādhadi and Srāvaņādi Vikrama years prevalent in some parts of Rājasthan, the first does not suit the dates of Nos. 4-6 and the second is equally unsuitable in the case of No. 5. The date of our inscription, viz. V. S. 1234, Chaitra-sudi 4, would thus appear to correspond to the 25th March 1178 A.D.
But this date of the reign of Přithvirāja III is earlier by a few months than the latest known date of his father and predecessor Sõmēsvara, viz. V. S. 1234, Bhadra-sudi 4=August 18,1178 A.D. as found in the Anvalda inscription. Since, however, the inscription under study clearly refers to the death of Sõmēsvara (cf. trida sa-pattanam prāptē in verse 4), its date can scarcely be earlier than the latest date in the records of that king, viz. August 18, 1178 A.D. It is therefore not improbable that V.S. 1234 in the date of our record is a mistake for V.S. 1235. In that case the date of the epigraph would correspond to March 14, 1179 A.D. Thus Prithvīrāja III would appear to have ascended the Chāhamāna throne after the death of his father Sömēsvara between the 18th August 1178 A.D. and the 14th March of the following year, that is to say, sometime about the end of 1178 A.D. or the beginning of 1179 A.D.
It seems that there is some confusion in the minds of the writers on Chāhamāna history about the English equivalent of the date of the Anvalda inscription of Sõmēsvara, viz. V.S. 1234, Bhadrasudi 4. which is the latest known record of that king. H. C. Ray regards the year as e. 1177 A.D.,' while D. C. Ganguly gives the year of the accession of Somēbvara's successor Prithviraja III as 1177 A.D.Although Ganguly does not refer to Bhattacharya's note on the inscription under study, his view seems to have been influenced by the wrong equation of V. S. 1234, the year of Prithvirāja's accession according to the present record, with 1177 A.D.
The only geographical name mentioned in the inscription is the agrahāra of Atisakha whence the family of Yasöräja hailed. I am not sure about the identification of the locality. 1 Bhandarkar's List, No. 344.
* Ibid., No. 360. * Ibid., No. 380. Another inscription of the time of Prithviraja III on the same pillar is dated V.8. 1245 (current), PhAlguna sudi 12, Thursday (12th February 1188 A.D.). Cf. IHQ, Vol. XXXV, p. 60.
• Ibid., No. 390. . Ibid., No. 412. • Soo G. H. Ojha, The Palaeography of India (Hindi), pp. 169-70.
1 Op. cit., Vol. II, p. 1082. Some other scholars also equato V.S. 1234 with 1177 A.D. (cf. Ind. Ant., Vol. LVI, p. 49).
• The Struggle for Empire, 1957, p. 83 ; of. pp. 104-05.
• Bhattacharya's article was published in the Proceedings of the Indian Histury Congress, 14th Session (Jaipur 1931) in 1855.
